No word on extent of injury to Raffi Torres after he collides with Ducks’ Emerson Etem

SAN JOSE — Maybe there’s just something about Raffi Torres that puts him in the spotlight whether he wants to be there or not.

The Sharks lost their home exhibition opener 3-2 to the Anaheim Ducks in overtime on Friday night, but it was a collision between Torres and Ducks forward Emerson Etem in the second period that was on everybody’s mind afterward.

Here’s the description from tomorrow’s print edition story — http://www.mercurynews.com/sharks/ci_24145465/san-jose-sharks-lose-exhibition-home-opener-anaheim — of their contact at 6:34 of the second period:

A replay showed that as Etem skated into the Sharks zone, he extended his leg behind him in an apparent effort to avoid going offside. As Torres skated behind Etem, the collision occurred, appearing to catch both players by surprise.

Both immediately fell to the ice. While Etem had to be helped to the Ducks locker room, he did return briefly for two shifts before calling it a night. Torres made it off the ice on his own, but did not return.

“He’s being checked by the medical staff and when we know something, we’ll let you know,” Sharks Coach Todd McLellan said. “It’s obviously not a good situation for either player, Etem or Torres. A complete accident, too. We hope they’ll both be well and ready to play.”

Torres did not talk with the media, but was seen leaving the locker room with his right knee bandaged, walking with a slight limp.

McLellan dismissed the idea that the league would review the hit, but with Torres’s reputation, I think somebody is going to ask for the visuals. The game wasn’t televised, but the play was captured on video for the in-house feeds.

And since you’re wondering, no, I don’t think the contact warrants any supplemental discipline. But I’ve been wrong about things like that before.

****The Sharks scoring came on a first-period goal by rookie Tomas Hertl and one in the second period by Tyler Kennedy — an obviously good start for both newcomers who are being slotted, for now at least, on the top two lines.

McLellan found good things to say about both after the game, but here’s his assessment of the team’s overall play.

“I thought that our team forgot a little bit how hard it was to play and how you have to make hard, firm plays and move the puck quick,” McLellan said. “Their team had played three or four games and you could see that at times. We got soft in the second period. We didn’t skate well, we turned the puck over and didn’t shoot it that much.”

That improved in the third, but the Sharks still fell victims to a shot by Anaheim defenseman Ben Lovejoy at 2:48 of overtime.

“We weren’t as good as we needed to be but it’s something we can work off of,” McLellan said. “As players leave the rink tonight, I want them to reflect on how hard it is to play, how disciplined you have to be to make plays and shift length and turnovers. How hard it is to read and react.”

David Pollak

David Pollak has been following the NHL forever and at the Mercury News as an editor or reporter since 1987. For almost a decade he wrote about the Sharks as the paper's Fan in the Stands before joining the sports department in 2001. He became the Sharks beat writer before the 2007-08 season and began this blog at that time. You can also follow him on Twitter at @PollakOnSharks.

2nd game of pre-season and already THE MEDIA not the NHL not some other team is starting in on Torres.

here is an Idea for those in the media……take this part out of the above blog…..

“McLellan dismissed the idea that the league would review the hit, but with Torres’s reputation, I think somebody is going to ask for the visuals. The game wasn’t televised, but the play was captured on video for the in-house feeds.

And since you’re wondering, no, I don’t think the contact warrants any supplemental discipline. But I’ve been wrong about things like that before.”

and leave only

“A replay showed that as Etem skated into his own zone, he extended his leg behind him in an apparent effort to avoid going offside. As Torres skated behind Etem, the collision occurred, appearing to catch both players by surprise”

” McLellan said. A complete accident, too. We hope they’ll both be well and ready to play.”

image is created by the media, only pre-season game 2 and already Big Bad Torres train has made a stop at SAP.

DieHardShark (DHS)

if its an accident and it was! why say anything more than that…..don’t add fuel to the fire its a spare the air day!

Andrew Gaul

Torres will be plagued for some time, sadly. Weird to hear myself say this, because I hated his style of play prior to his 25-gamer…but the Coyotes spent a lot of time on him, and he has really cleaned things up. DW spending $100K to speak out on the playoff suspension says a lot, too.

JasonB

Thoughts on the game in general: I didn’t see a whole lot of young talent that impressed. Comrie(94) was probably the one that stood out the most. I thought Schwartz(72) had a few good shifts, but some inconsistency.

I was surprised the energy level seemed low, particularly in the first two periods. I figured the young guys in particular, playing in front of the home crowd, would be skating harder and trying to impress – however at times it did look like a few were a little in awe of things.

Finally, the ice condition looked horrible. I counted at least 5 shark players that just fell down for no reason, and at least one shark breakaway because an anaheim player did the same. Hopefully they fix that up soon.

hockeyhappens

I am not keen to back to back home preseason games…

Phat Stat Phil

I don’t think he’s really “cleaned things up”. It only took a lockout shortened season after the Hossa hit for Torres to be suspended for concussing another player.

Phat Stat Phil

For what it’s worth, I’m also pretty certain that knee-on-knee collision was an accident and I’m not inclined to give Raffi the benefit of the doubt.

Some of the young players look good. I was thrilled to see Sateri get the start tonight. That glove hand is crazy fast.

Clemenza

Ah yes….you know everything about Torres’ modus operandi these days. In what capacity do you work with the team to have this inside info?
Thought not….
Despite the fact that the entire NHL (including the player who was hit) thinks it was a bogus suspension, you’re still, after the season has ended, twisting the facts to support your anti-Raffi campaign.
But please, go ahead & continue to make your overly-biased assumptions to try & paint the picture that he should t be in the league.

Buddy Elf

I hope “Marleau to Kennedy” becomes a very regular occurrence.

BASS

Backup goalie contestants 2, starter 0

puckace

Stanley Cups: Nemo 1 Backups 0

ice

checking in under the new format. geez i stay away for a couple of weeks to finish planning my wedding and everything changes! guess it was about time anyway. does this mean little sieve can come back?

Beer League Rocks

Snow Shovel, Are you boycotting the new format because all your poems disappeared?

Looking forward to the start of the regular season.

Phat Stat Phil

I love how you argue that I don’t work with the team, therefore I don’t know Raffi, but then claim that you know what the entire NHL thinks.

Especially when at least one member of the NHL: Brenden Shanahan made very clear that he thought otherwise.

But the logic of your complaint notwithstanding, you misunderstood my comment. The fact is that “changing his ways” means to me that he’s not throwing dirty hits any longer.

There’s no assumptions here — ‘overly-biased’ or otherwise. It’s strictly numbers. The fact is that it took significantly less than a full season for him to throw a dirty (i.e. suspendable) hit and the targeted player suffered a concussion.

I couldn’t tell you exactly at what point it’s fair to say that someone’s ways have changed. But I’m pretty sure most people would put that number somewhere north of 82. I certainly would, judging by how I feel about Matt Cooke.

hockeyhappens

“…for him to throw a dirty (i.e. suspendable) hit and the targeted player suffered a concussion.”

Sorry Phil, the recipient of the hit has disagreed with that statement. And, there were reports conflicting with that stating that the injury was really a shoulder.

BTW: there is the clarified/new standard for Shanoban to judge these hits. My interpretation is simply that Shanny would not have even reviewed the hit based on the clarification. I think the clarification came about because the ban was completely unjustified and Shanny blew it. Everyone took notice at DW’s 100K stance on the injustice of it.

Much of the rest of the league, was pundits and GMs and Players and coaches that disagreed with the ruling. Of course not everyone disagreed with it.

The discrepancy really is this time, you present your opinion as the only facts in this case.

Clemenza

Ok….so you’re relying on Shanaban’s explanation to support your position…?

And again, when only 1 or 2 people (who we clearly in over their head where it comes to handing out discipline) and the test of the league calls it a hockey play, don’t ya think there’s something wrong??

Lot o’ credibility there..right? Lol

And #’s don’t have anything to do with it…

Sorry, but they don’t.

Buddy Elf

How much preseason stats matter: 0

Buddy Revell

Kurz is reporting that Torres is gone for up to 4 months with an ACL injury as a result of this collision. That’s not what the Sharks needed….

CMoreSharks

Looks like Kevin Kurz is reporting that Raffi is out for at least 6 weeks with an ACL injury. Worst case could be as long as 3-4 months.

She doesn’t need to claim to know what the entire NHL thinks – plenty of NHL sources, players, coaches, GMs, as pointed out – even the guy that got hit – have gone out on a very short limb to say that they don’t think it was a dirty or suspension-worthy hit. You have one thing to trot out: the Shanahan video (despite the fact that his logic in that video contradicts other video’s he’s done, and the fact that NHL discipline is an inconsistent Wheel of Justice [which, at least in this case, does actually turn out to be blind]).

So, yeah, according to the vastly overwhelming majority of NHL sources who’ve opined and who haven’t spent the last season turning league discipline into an almost bigger circus than it was under Campbell, that was not a dirty hit, and as such doesn’t really support your ‘he hasn’t changed his game’ belief (note I say belief since, like religion, it isn’t based on fact, given your misuse of stats last Spring and obvious bias regardless of what reality throws your way).

But, hey, I’m glad you felt the need to chime in and let us know you don’t think Raffi was really at fault in an incident where someone unexpectedly stuck a leg out in front of him.

Phat Stat Phil

I had the courtesy to link you to a copy of an article which stated the injury was a concussion. You linked me to nothing indicating that it was a shoulder injury.

And there’s probably a good reason for that. Because it wasn’t a shoulder injury. When Stoll had a seizure in July, he said it was unrelated to the concussion he received from Raffi Torres.

This adequately proves that he did in fact have a concussion from Raffi’s hit and that it was not a shoulder injury as you erroneously claimed.

Regardless of what some in the NHL said, it is factually incorrect to say “the entire NHL”. And, in fact, the person who matters most — Shanahan — felt it was suspendable. Ergo, he was suspended.

It was a suspendable hit. There was a concussion on the play. What I said stands as true and I’ve given you evidence of it.

Phat Stat Phil

I assume you meant “the rest of the league”. So, again, would you mind telling me how you know the opinions of the rest of the league?

For example, I didn’t see Jim Rutherford’s — the GM of the Carolina Hurricanes — opinion on it anywhere.

You’re resorting to hyperbole and that is neither facts nor logic.

Phat Stat Phil

An exact quote from Clemenza:
“Despite the fact that the entire NHL (including the player who was hit) thinks it was a bogus suspension…”

If you claim that “the entire NHL” thinks something, then I think it’s fair game to expect someone to be able to explain how they know that. Especially after you take a shot at someone else’s credibility on that score.

You’ve mentioned that “a majority” of “NHL sources” think it wasn’t a suspension.

I’ll let alone the question that Clemenza raised to me about my lack of insider status. I’m pretty sure that applies to you as well.

So, how do you define NHL sources? GMs? Can you even produce 15 GMs opinions on it — because that’s what you’d need to prove “a majority”. In point of fact, the only GM’s opinion I can find on it is Wilson’s. And they’re the guys that define the game, like it or not.

Are you counting reporters? I don’t even know how many NHL accredited media passes there are out there. Can you produce an opinion from “a majority” of them?

Dude… Stop while you’re way behind. Quit frasping at straws & trying to turn my words against me.
We get it. You’re trying to justify your point of view by providing selective information…it rings incredibly hollow….

The LA Times writing it up about how Torres is the bad guy? What a shocker, Phil! Shanaban trying to justify keeping his job even though the guy has zero consistency with the punishment he doles out, & after Dean Lombardi throws a hissy fit to the league brass after the game? What a revelation!

Your first clue that he doesn’t belong in the disciplinatian’s job is that he was appointed by Bettman…that should be red flag #1 all the way across the board…

(Your 2nd mistake was referring to the LA Times as credible news…)
But hey, if Shanaban says it’s right, it must be, eh?

LOL

Phat Stat Phil

Yeah — heaven forfend that I should hold you accountable for the stuff you say. Seriously — what kind of jerk would actually read what you said and then expect you to provide a basis for it?

Your latest comment relies on hyperbole (again!), a lack of evidence (again! Can you provide credible evidence of this supposed “hissy fit”?), and now specious ad hominem attacks against Bettman, Shanahan, and the LA Times.

I’m going to make this really simple for both of us. You’re obviously a waste of my time in that you refuse to discuss things logically or justify your claims. As a result, I’m simply done responding to you. Goodbye and good riddance.

hockeyhappens

So this is a “who can throw out more links” contest?

Nice…

hockeyhappens

“…refuse to discuss things logically…”

Phil, really. What is logical of your argument that Raffi clearly hasn’t changed his ways — because he got suspended so quickly after serving a long suspension, on a hit that has been a controversial decision by an inconsistent Shanahan.

If that is your proof, then Why would DW spend 100K of his own $$ to MAKE THE POINT to the league and everyone else that the decision was bogus.

Buddy Elf

You seem to be the goalie preseason stats pro, so I will defer to you… How about that shutout? It’s preseason still, so it doesn’t matter, but if you wanted a showing from Nemo in the preseason, you got it.

Clemenza

There’s your hissy fit right there, Phil.
And yep it was documented in a couple of articles out there after the game in question that Lombardi was dressing down a league official after the game about the hit. I’m thoroughly apologetic that I have a life outside of the Internet & CORSI #’s, & I’m not about to waste my time pulling web links all day to go back & forth with you about something that happened last season…..
Besides, you’re right all the time anyway…

Phat Stat Phil

You suggested that it wasn’t a concussion. I provided evidence otherwise.

This is called “Whose facts are correct?”

At this point, you’re obviously not winning.

Phat Stat Phil

I love how you’ve been forced to qualify your claim, but you’re still trying to keep up the appearance of the hard line. Reminds me a bit of party politics in Russia where no one wanted to appear that they weren’t living up to Stalin’s ideal.

You ask “What is logical of your argument….” and then proceed to explain the logic. Great technique. But really — isn’t it easier just to admit that you were wrong and go from there?

I guess that’s harder for some people than others. Some people just aren’t that big.

I fail to see how a discussion of Doug Wilson’s disagreement lends itself to Torres having not changed his ways.

I also don’t see how a discussion of Shanahan’s consistency is relevant, though it is a little funny that you argue that he’s inconsistent and then argue that Shanahan is consistent in punishing Raffi Torres.

In spite of your apparent hero worship of Torres, the fact is that less than a regular season later, he was again standing over an opponent that he had just concussed. That does not indicate change.

BASS

That shutout was nice, eh? I got to see the Nemo of last season. I hope he continues. He looked really good, comfortable, managed his rebounds well.
I don’t buy that “stats don’t matter in the pre-season” talk. DP and all other Media types all reported on Hertl’s 2 goals last night, yet I don’t see anyone telling them that the stats don’t matter. All of the sports websites keep a wins/losses talley in the pre-season. Does it count in the final talley of the regular season? of course not, but they do matter. It is part of the game. Every player is saying that they are going out there to win (a W in the win column), yes, even in the pre-season. When you try to win, and cant, it’s not a good thing for the mindset. You want to go into the regular season with confidence, and the numbers validate your good or bad feelings.
I’m not saying that stats tell the whole story, in fact I’m in the camp where I feel that the tangables are just as valuable.
Thanks for taking interest in my opinion of the game last night. How did you like it?

Buddy Elf

Everyone is reporting on it because there’s been nothing to report except players personal lives, captain skates, and free agent frenzy for a few months now… that’s why they are reporting on it.

In 2009, Douglas Murray scored a hat trick in a preseason exhibition game. That season, he scored 4 goals total. What happened to his scoring confidence from the preseason? Oh yah, that hat trick meant nothing but an exciting story for journalists. He scored it against a goalie who had only played 7 games in the NHL prior to that (he let in 27 goals in that stretch, almost 4 goals per game), and he never played a regular season NHL game after that. Which leads me to the point of preseason games and why they don’t really matter.

A major purpose of preseason games is evaluation of non-roster talent to determine who will make it onto the team on opening day, or who to call up when injuries happen.

That means that you may be playing against a non-NHL goalie, non-NHL defensemen, and you play be playing with non-NHL forwards. That can significantly skew any stats there may be and is the exact reason that a guy like Murray can score 3 goals in one preseason game and go on to score just 4 goals in 79 games in the real season.

The shutout was great… the beginning of the game and a small stretch mid game were the only times he was really even tested.

BASS

Well, I think they matter. Neither you or I know if, in your example, if Murray played with more confidence or not. Confidence to pinch on a play, confident to take one more shot in the regular season (make it or not), or more confidence in his ability overall. Without that pre-season hattrick, he may have not been able to get romantic with his girlfriend that night, who knows what it meant to him.
I’m not here to try to change anyone’s mind on any opinion, that’s a fool’s game. I’m here to voice my opinion and share in other’s opinions, not think that only my opinion matters, and if everyone doesn’t agree with me, then, well, they’re just wrong, lmao. I’m glad to hear your opinion and thank you for sharing it with us.
Have a great day, Mr Buddy Elf
Go Sharks!

hockeyhappens

I never suggested anything like that. Simply, there were reports that there might not have been a concussion. You expect the truth about injuries in the POs?

Then You ignore all other evidence and that contradicts your personal opinion on this whole thing. That is the bottom line.

More and more players are getting concussions from hits NOT to the head. How are you going to deal with that when no suspension get handed out to a player that simply made a very hard body check? Body checks happen repeatedly in a hockey game. Even in a rec league where intentional body checks are discouraged. Are you one of these goalies that tend to get run into intentionally? And once, you did get a concussion as a result?

DW is in a better and more qualified position to judge Torres. I’ll trust him and TMac on that scouting report over yours any day of the week.

Shanahan’s inconsistency is more than relevent because you are using it as the main basis for your idea that Torres hasn ‘t changed. People smarter than me about this issue have said that Brendon’s rationale in that video doesn’t match what is actually in the video. Any one with an open mind or tendency to be objective understands that.

Phat Stat Phil

You claim to have an open mind and yet you’ refuse to accept where you’re plainly wrong.

And in this latest installment, you’ve given another fine example. The article I linked you to was from well after the playoffs. But, knowing you, you didn’t bother reading it.

hockeyhappens

C’mon Phil, Doesn’t matter if I read it or not now does it. Bud, no need to get personal about any of this either. So, keep sanctimony on your side of the keyboard.

But I predict there is something you can’t accept for some reason. I have not once said you were wrong that Torres hasn’t changed his. We don’t know this yet do we?I think the current stats favor that he has despite the controversial Shanaban. There is a reason I have not claimed the guy has changed. I cannot prove it. It is only my opinion that I think he has.

Using the Shanahan sanctioned suspension does not prove your case. If you think it does, then you’ve closed yourself off to other opinions about that play you’re hanging your hat on — the whole reason for this discussion.

I will clarify what I think the 100K from DW meant. Basically, no matter what Torres motives are on the ice during a game, past reputation or not, the hit on Jarret Stoll was not an offense that required more discipline and Shanahan blew that call.

The “open mind” here, clearly, and IMO goes for most others, is the person that had a negative idea about Torres and is willing to see what the guy does to prove he’s no longer playing the game he was told and paid to play. I had that negative idea. Then, we found out one fighting penalty and a couple of minors since return from suspension. And the fight was the answer to the expected retaliation from the Hawks.

I am not sure why you can’t have an open mind about Torres. If the guy was as bad you keep claiming, IMO, he would not have had so few PIMs, no matter how many games he played to acrue so few. If a tiger can’t change his stripes, he would have concussed another player his first game back from suspension. (hint: that is why that metaphor/analogy doesn’t work).

Phat Stat Phil

That’s the thing. I DO have an open mind. Matt Cooke is an excellent example. He was suspended five times over a course of four years.

He never had a nice, shiny number of PIMs in the low double digits in the next season — which is fine because you can take penalties for a lot of things that aren’t necessarily gutless plays. Heck, Lidstrom had years where he took more than 16 penalties and that’s as nigh impeachable a reputation as I can think of.

(It’s worth noting that Cooke’s numbers did drop though — 129 to 44 in full seasons)

So what does Cooke have that Raffi doesn’t? A complete lack of suspensions since March, 2011.

You can’t say that Torres has a worse reputation and that’s why he got suspended. It was Cooke’s hit on Savard that got Bettman to say that he was upset about the hit, but he was more upset that there wasn’t anything in the league rules to punish it. By that quote, he’s arguably the reason we have the hit to the head rule in the first place.

Torres, as yet, simply hasn’t re-earned the benefit of the doubt. A lack of tripping, holding, and hooking isn’t what earns that. It’s showing that you can play the game without concussing your opponents.

It takes more than 16 games — or even 48 games — to show that. Cooke’s done it.

Torres hasn’t. Games in teal don’t count double. And regardless of what you think about that suspension, there’s plenty of people who think that Torres hit was dirty.

(By the way — I don’t agree that Torres would have necessarily concussed a player his first game back. Even during his worst period of head hunting, he wasn’t getting called every game.)

hockeyhappens

OK, I still don’t see how the Shan-o-ban was proof Raffi hasn’t changed his game. That is what this discussion is, isn’t it? You made that claim.

Don’t you think concussions will happen in this game regardless?

Why does there need to be a benefit of the doubt for Raffi on this. All you need to do watch the hit fairly and maybe even compare it to other similar or worse hits that resulted in concussions that got no discipline.

I recall the endless media coverage of Crosby’s concussions. I am sure someone was suspended for any one of those, BUT, I don’t recall anyone at all. Why isn’t a name flowing off my keyboard? It was Crosby after all. You know, same with Pronger. Without looking it up, can anyone recall how that concussion happened? Was it a hit? A stick? a fall? Head into the boards? Whatever the reason, I think it’s a fair conclusion that it ended his career. The person, ice, stick, or glass has not constantly rolled out in our face all the time.

Phat Stat Phil

Took me a while to get back over here. Long story.

Incidentally, no one was suspended and it was never actually indicated what happened with Crosby. Some people were pointing at a Steckel hit during the Winter Classic that was marginal. It looked entirely innocuous and I came away with the impression that people were looking for any hit on Crosby to blame it on.

I don’t recall Pronger’s off hand though. Technically, he’s still on as a player for the Flyers though.

(The internet says it was some contact from Martin Hanzal and that there was an eye injury associated with it. I remember the eye injury part, but not a report of a concussion. Lots of teams were — and still kinda are — hush-hush about the C word at the time.)

I agree that some concussions will occur. They’re a part of the game for better or worse.

That said, Raffi’s hit didn’t look innocuous to me. While watching the game, I saw it coming a mile away when he curled around at the opposite side faceoff circle and went straight into Stoll while he was trying to settle that puck down. It reminded me at the time of the hit that he threw on Nate Prosser.

At best, it’s borderline. It was at best in that grey area. There clearly was a concussion as a result of that hit. And — worst of all to me — Stoll was vulnerable and barely had control of the puck at the time of the hit.

Those factors are why the benefit of the doubt comes into play. And after 44 games? I think it’s ridiculous that people even talk about change at that point. At that stage, Cookie was still getting sarcastic mentions of being a Lady Byng candidate and rightfully so.

hockeyhappens

“Those factors are why the benefit of the doubt comes into play. And
after 44 games? I think it’s ridiculous that people even talk about
change at that point.”

Phil, Why is it only a one street? Your exact logic…it’s ridiculous after 44 games to think he hasn’t changed.

“At best, it’s borderline. It was at best in that grey area.”

The other side of the street: At WORST, it’s borderline. It was at best in that grey area. From your other point, it’s ridiculous after that grey area hit to think he hasn’t changed.

“While watching the game, I saw it coming a mile away when he curled around…”

I am calling BS here. The only thing anyone saw, IF they were specifically watching, is a fwd skating a route while forechecking. You did not see the fwd skate a route to concuss an opposing player who is also a really good friend.

Phat Stat Phil

You can call BS if you’d like. Unfortunately, I can’t pull up the comments since they were deleted in the refresh, but I did see him line up the check at the time. It pretty well ends discussion if you’re going to claim I’m lying about things though.

As for your rather simplistic question about why I’d say he hasn’t changed after 44 games, it’s very simple. After one game, would you say a player had changed? Presumably, you’d say no. What about two games? So on and so forth.

And let’s be honest — you’re not really talking about an evaluation of 44 games. You didn’t see most of those games. You saw the ones where he played against the Sharks and when he played for the Sharks.

That makes the number about 18 games

And you’re honestly going to claim that makes for a fair evaluation of whether a player’s changed? Bologna.

What it comes down to is that you’re defending the guy because he’s in teal which is a pretty disgusting moral standard.

Incidentally, it’s very difficult to track down all of Torres’ dirty hits. I tried at one point to figure out how frequently he’d thrown that sort of hit, but then you see things like this:

and it gets really hard to tell which games he didn’t throw a dirty hit in. He wasn’t suspended for that hit even though it was clearly a hit to the head.

Do you go by penalties? I can show you hits to the head by Torres that weren’t called.

The fact is that he’s a dirty player. In a perfect world, neither he, Bertuzzi, nor Cooke are in the league. I can suffer Bertuzzi and Cooke because their games have had a measure of respect injected back into them.

But Torres? That hit on Stoll was a dirty hit. Plenty of people think so. Stoll’s concussion provides some pretty good evidence. The slow-mo shows that the hit went through to his head.

There is no “other side of the street” where this is a perfectly good hit. And if you think this would have been OK in the 1990s, I’ll refer you to Don Cherry.

hockeyhappens

Phil,

I didn’t say it was BS that you said what you saw. I remember you said the same thing back in May. I called BS on you back then too…not as descriptively. I guarantee, you didn’t know what Raffi was thinking when he was forechecking and skating his route.

Now, I might put aside War and Peace and tke as long to read the rest of your response.

hockeyhappens

You rolled out that Grape video before too I think. I could be mistaken. I love Don Cherry. But, I don’t agree with everything he takes a stand on. If you watched him on HNIC last night, he talked about hybrid icing and why he doesn’t like it. He “Cherry picked” some video showing the players being confused about a call. He actually makes a good against it. I disagree with that however.

I want to re-enforce what I said before this comment. Please don’t say I am defending Raffi when I clearly haven’t. It’s simply attacking your argument.

Also, please don’t tell us you knew what Raffi was thinking when he hit Stoll.

Please don’t tell us that Raffi targeted the head when all the videos clearly show the shoulder was the first contact point.

hockeyhappens

Apologies Phil. This isn’t the video I thought it was. I couldn’t watch before because the merc web site is/was turtle slow and would crash my browser.

BTW: this hit was penalized. So, I don’t see the point.

So now after watching…What does that hit have to do with Don Cherry?

Actually, this hit was a good hit prior to Shanoban. The Michalek hit was “never ruled on” good wasn’t it?

If I recall this video shows the hit way before the Hossa “attempted” decapitation. Again, this was a time when Torres was getting paid to play like he did. That IS the way he played since first stepping on to NHL ICE.

That is another subject actually. How and the NHL is doing to prevent head shots and concussions. They are trying everything they can think of.

One is what are players doing to make illegal hits. One key thing, which didn’t get put into the rules as a decision is the path taken to make a check. This season it’s been further clarified. Prior to last season, there was no thought from the NHL coaches and officials relating to that. The only exception was hitting from behind along the boards. Hit from behind in open was legal.

I didn’t like that hit by Raffi on Murray. I still don’t. Raffi was rightfully penalized. And bad for Murray with his head down though. Still a penalty. This seasons clarification which addresses the players path, it was a legal path taken by Raffi. Just like the hit from Torres on Stoll — a legal path. Still, this hit on Murray didn’t need to happen from Raffi.

Phat Stat Phil

It was a suspendable hit. It was a dirty hit. It concussed a player and put him out of the playoffs. That’s more than proof enough.

Especially since in this argument, you’re attempting to prove the positive — that there has been a change instead of the expected retention of the status quo. Someone needs to revisit their rhetoric courses….

Say what you will about Don Cherry and whether or not you think he’s a good source, but the fact is that he argues consistently that the NHL is making it harder to put out big hits. He’s been critical of Shanahan to the point that Shanny indirectly made a video response to him.

If anyone was going to come out and defend a good, hard hitting player, then it’s hard to imagine someone more obvious than Grapes. Heck, Shanahan even felt the need to respond to Grapes in one of his early videos.

Did he come out to defend Raffi Torres? No. He came out to talk about a player who looked like he had talent and has traded in that talent for dirty hits and a lack of respect for his opponents.

When old time hockey Grapes says your hits are dirty and agrees with Shanahan, it’s time for the league to do the right thing and make you to hang ’em up.

When you argue in the face of that unlikely confluence of opinion and insist on the basis of a fraction of a season — 15 games during which he wore your team’s sweater! — that Torres changed, you’re going beyond garden variety jingoism and descending into pure lunacy and irrationality. You *are* defending him because you’re not even claiming that it’s a borderline hit! You’re trying to whitewash the whole damned thing while arguing that the suspension and that the negative opinions of the hit don’t really mean anything!

Look, you made the war & peace joke. The reason I can throw so many words at you isn’t merely my own wordiness. It’s simply due to the number of different angles in which you are obviously and plainly wrong in your assessment.

You want me to write less? There’s an easy way to do it: Stop being silly.

hockeyhappens

Phil,

I think this discussion is done.

When you’ve decided I am arguing points that I am clearly not if you’ve read and understood anything that I’ve written. Example: You’ve made an inaccurate conclusion of what I think of Don Cherry.

This discussion is done when you tell me to ignore what I’ve read and heard Stoll say himself, that it wasn’t a dirty hit, but a “hockey” hit and he didn’t think his good friend should have been suspended. Sorry, I am not sure how anyone can UNhear or UNread that. It flies in the face of every point you’re trying to make.

IMO, You’re trying to say the decision about the hit isn’t controversial. I think that means you’ve ignored everything that has been talked written regarding the matter. Well, this may be insulting if you’re right thinking, but that attitude is just like the guy at 1600 saying he won’t negotiate…